Why is there not more support for Huckabee?

And screw the bible thumping. I want a seperation of church and state.
Click to expand...

So, you want an athiest running the country? I don't think you really know, more less others, what separation between church and state means. Just because he believes doesn't mean that he should not be president. His beliefs are similar in context to how this country was founded to begin with...Judeo-Christian PHILOSOPHY. I'd fear an athiest or muslim as president before one that is sound in his own beliefs.

OH NO! A CHRISTIAN FANATIC! He's going to shove his beliefs down our throats. "OK, everybody must be saved during my presidency or everybody is going to hell!":rolleyes: Give me a big fat break. How many presidents were staunch believers in their faith? Don't see us in a Neo-christian state of government now due to their oppression. As a matter of fact, I see the lack of morally convicted presidents being a part of the social decline we're in now... Just my opinion, of course.

To address the OP question: Because we don't know him. The only potential GOP candidate doing less to expose his views than Huckabee is Thompson. Let's wait and see how he does in Iowa, and whether that showing attracts enough big donors for a viable national campaign.
Click to expand...

My thoughts are similar to yours. Just a short time ago, candidates were stumping way too early for my taste. Now, it's time to see them step up their efforts. Time is starting to run out for the "nobodies" to prove they are the "somebodies"...

Does the Governor of Arkansas not have veto power?
Click to expand...

Yes, but congress have the power to override his veto, also.

Huckabee may be pro-2A but he is woefully weak on illegal immigration. That, for me, is reason enough to not support him.
Click to expand...

And the jury is still out for me to believe this or not. I'm suspect on his stance on the issue. This is one of the biggest issues for me as far as a hot button issue...

As strongly as I feel about the 2nd and would like to vote for someone that feels the same way, I cannot take anyone seriously that does not believe in evolution and wants to teach creationism in the public schoools as "science".
Click to expand...

But it's OK for public schools to teach the Theory of Evolution in science class? How biased is that statement? This is one example of how kids are being brainwashed.

Huckabee is also the most second Amendment friendy. He's a champion of the Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

Allenomics, although you may be right..there is one other candidate that may give Huckabee a run for the money on this. However, he's still a staunch supporter no less...

ive done all the research i need to do. to say he is conservative is laughable. unless a near complete disregard for the constitution except for, seemingly, the second amendment is "conservative" now. just because you are christian, pro-life, against gay marriage etc, doesnt make you a conservative. hannity et al may want you to believe that, but it is far from the truth. will you (or any huckabee supporters) respond to any of the facts i have presented?

smoking bans?
raising taxes some 20-odd times? (btw, i was thinking about it, and the excuse that the arkansas legislature has a dem majority is a very poor one, seeing as our current congress has a dem majority...)
stance on global warming?
illegal immigration? (current lip service doesnt count)
federal ban on abortion?
Click to expand...

Alright, Molson. You assert some valid questions about Huckabee. I'll try to explain my stance.

1. Smoking bans. If he wants to ban tobacco products on government property, well, go ahead. I can't stand cigarette smoke. HOWEVER, I don't think ANY government, whether state or federal, should impose laws against tobacco products on PRIVATE property or businesses. Whatever Huckabee imposes, it really isn't enough for me to not vote for him. I'll allow smokers to do what they need to do in that respect.

2. Tax raising 20 times? I think if he really did ADVOCATE raising taxes, it would be a bigger stink when he claims that he isn't a fan of raising them. I need to research more into why/if they were during his time as governor. i.e. congress overriding vetos, citizens voted for the increase, etc.

3. Arkansas legislature as a dem in my opinon IS a good one. You can see how very little can get done sometimes when two different parties are represented...common problem. Excuse for ALL his actions? No. But, he can't just wave a majic wand and have his way either...

4. Global warming? Since everybody has about as many definitons of it as people with opinions...I don't care what his stance is as long as he doesn't want to save the african fruit fly from extinction by raising my taxes to fund it...

5. Abortion? This is one of the few issues that I see that the federal govt. should be allowed to be involved. In a nutshell without going off the deep end, to me life is a life whether it's in a mother's belly or not. Somebody needs to protect the defensless. Argue all day on this one. But, I will never change my mind on this.

Whether you agree with me or not, I hope I respected your wishes on answering your questions and hope it ties with the OP's questions...

You guys let me know when you find a candidate you agree with on EVERY position.
Click to expand...

Raccol, you basically made the MOST effective statement on this forum in quite some time. Huckabee may not fall into every category that I agree with. But, he is still someone I'm seriously considering.
 
Tuttle8:

If you believe that evolution is a theory and creationsim is science then nothing I say (because you have to be taking it purely "on faith" as they say) will change your mind. I will just have to respectfully disagree. I personally cannot support a Presidential candidate in the 21st century that simply ignores thousands of years of scientific advances/discoveries because they inconveniently conflict with his religion views.
 
If you believe that evolution is a theory and creationsim is science then nothing I say (because you have to be taking it purely "on faith" as they say) will change your mind. I will just have to respectfully disagree. I personally cannot support a Presidential candidate in the 21st century that simply ignores thousands of years of scientific advances/discoveries because they inconveniently conflict with his religion views.
Click to expand...

Sure, and all those archealogists are digging up little kids toys...touche

I can agree to disagree...I'm fine with that. Just don't see how it should be one way and not the other. After all, evolution is still theory, not proof. No scientist on this earth can prove we came from an amoeba....
 
Tuttle8 said:
1. Smoking bans. If he wants to ban tobacco products on government property, well, go ahead. I can't stand cigarette smoke. HOWEVER, I don't think ANY government, whether state or federal, should impose laws against tobacco products on PRIVATE property or businesses. Whatever Huckabee imposes, it really isn't enough for me to not vote for him. I'll allow smokers to do what they need to do in that respect.
Click to expand...

i can agree with that...well, at least accept that compromise. in the interest of full disclosure, i am a smoker currently, but me and my fiancee are going to be quitting after we get married. the reason i get worked up so much about smoking bans has nothing to do with cigarettes specifically, its about banning things because someone else doesnt like them. the prohibitionist mindset. its the same mindset that advocates banning guns, and if we as conservatives accept it with cigarettes, it makes our argument against gun control much weaker.

2. Tax raising 20 times? I think if he really did ADVOCATE raising taxes, it would be a bigger stink when he claims that he isn't a fan of raising them. I need to research more into why/if they were during his time as governor. i.e. congress overriding vetos, citizens voted for the increase, etc.
Click to expand...

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/01/a_report_on_mike_huckabees_fis.php

heres one of the links i found searching for "huckabee taxes". it seems they rely on the CATO institute for much of their information, which i find to be a credible source.

hers a snippet:
clubforgrowth said:
* Immediately upon taking office, Governor Huckabee signed a sales tax hike in 1996 to fund the Games and Fishing Commission and the Department of Parks and Tourism (Cato Policy Analysis No. 315, 09/03/98).
* He supported an internet sales tax in 2001 (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07).
* He publicly opposed the repeal of a sales tax on groceries and medicine in 2002 (Arkansas News Bureau 08/30/02).
* He signed bills raising taxes on gasoline (1999), cigarettes (2003) (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07), and a $5.25 per day bed-tax on private nursing home patients in 2001 (Arkansas New Bureau 03/01/01).
* He proposed another sales take hike in 2002 to fund education improvements (Arkansas News Bureau 12/05/02).
* He opposed a congressional measure to ban internet taxes in 2003 (Arkansas News Bureau 11/21/03).
* In 2004, he allowed a 17% sales tax increase to become law (The Gurdon Times 03/02/04).
Click to expand...

now, i admit, there could be more to the story, but i suspect it would have been mentioned if he tried to veto any of these measures.

as far as taxes, this is the most worrying for me:
clubforgrowth said:
Finally, Governor Huckabee opposed further tax cuts at a 2005 gathering of Iowa conservatives (AP 09/17/05). On January 28, 2007, Governor Huckabee refused to pledge not to raise taxes if elected President, first on Meet the Press and then at the National Review Conservative Summit. The evidence suggests that his commitment to protecting taxpayers evidenced in his early gubernatorial years may be a thing of the past.
Click to expand...

3. Arkansas legislature as a dem in my opinon IS a good one. You can see how very little can get done sometimes when two different parties are represented...common problem. Excuse for ALL his actions? No. But, he can't just wave a majic wand and have his way either...
Click to expand...

i think you may have misunderstood my point. my point is that he seemingly allowed the dems to pass tax after tax (assuming he was truly against higher taxes in the first place). i dont see raising/allowing the dems to raise taxes multiple times as getting very little done. it seems like a lot got done, just in the wrong direction. i dont think he will stand up against the dems, we may see the veto stamp in even more pristene condition than bush's is.

4. Global warming? Since everybody has about as many definitons of it as people with opinions...I don't care what his stance is as long as he doesn't want to save the african fruit fly from extinction by raising my taxes to fund it...
Click to expand...

it seems he is much like our governor here in MN. gov pawlenty is getting really cuddly with the sierra club and other wacko environmentalist groups.

things like this is what is concerning:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/13/candidates-focus-on-global-warming/
NYT said:
Mr. Huckabee also said the United States was “pathetically behind the curve” when it comes to federal research and spending for the development of alternative fuels. If elected, he said he would work with Congress on a comprehensive plan to achieve full energy independence by the end of his second term. Mr. Huckabee also expressed his support for a cap-and-trade policy.
Click to expand...

how much you wanna bet that "energy independence" has nothing to do with drilling in ANWAR or any other sensible, short-term solutions with a long term plan? there are many reasons his stance is a very bad one, but it kinda delves into another topic which really isnt at issue here.

5. Abortion? This is one of the few issues that I see that the federal govt. should be allowed to be involved. In a nutshell without going off the deep end, to me life is a life whether it's in a mother's belly or not. Somebody needs to protect the defensless. Argue all day on this one. But, I will never change my mind on this.
Click to expand...

like i said, i am right there with you on the principles behind abortion. the problem is that we cannot allow our desire to stop babies from being murdered to undermine our constitution. once we do that, we make everything else fair game and those same tactics can be used against us (both on abortion and many other issues).

Whether you agree with me or not, I hope I respected your wishes on answering your questions and hope it ties with the OP's questions...
Click to expand...

[insert thumbsup emoticon here] absolutely! you posted exactly what ive been looking for, and i sincerely thank you. i have no vendetta against huckabee supporters, i just want to make sure everyone knows what they are getting into. i personally find huckabee to be right up there with guiliani, except with a bit better camoflauge.
 
Same here. I don't care what your religion (or lack thereof) is so long as it doesn't interfere in your execution of the office.
 
I like most I hear from Huckabee, except the immigration issue. I just do not think the guy is electable; though his polling numbers are now about twice that of Ron Paul's.

www.realclearpolitics.com

You Paul voters really need to re-evaluate your other choices as he doesn't have the critical mass to get the nomination. I say that with no malice, only true concern over this country's future.
 
You Paul voters really need to re-evaluate your other choices as he doesn't have the critical mass to get the nomination. I say that with no malice, only true concern over this country's future.
Click to expand...

Why should that matter in a primary? In a primary, the idea is to pick the candidate that most supports your goals. If your guy loses, you then vote for whoever wins the primary, as he will still be better than the Democrat.

If I pick Ron Paul, and he loses (a given, by the way), that tells Republican leadership that I wanted a candidate who stood for smaller government, less spending and programs, and less involvement int he affairs of other sovereign nations. I believe if people did this, it would have an impact on the overall direction of the party.

If I pick Rudy Giliani, it gives the party a different message. It tells them that I like bigger, more intrusive government, more security, and more gun control. It sends the party in a different direction.

Instead of Republicans bashing RP supporters, they should instead look at why people like Ron Paul, and incorporate some of that into the platform.
 
i dont think he will stand up against the dems, we may see the veto stamp in even more pristene condition than bush's is.
Click to expand...

There's that also.
All of the candidates who have governed or otherwise worked "compromise solutions" with democrats have spotty records that they blame on the liberals. That raises the question:
What are they going to blame on the next legislature, which promises to be even more strongly Dem than this one?

I don't want a president that will cave to the left and Huckabee has that record established.

Unregistered,
You're drifting. :)
 
Unregistered, I certainly don't have an issue with standing up for one's principles. But, one has to look past the primaries and take a long hard look at which candidate is electable and who could beat the Dem nominee; we know who that'll likely be at this point.
 
Huckabee is an interesting candidate. It sounds like he's gaining some support. He needs to at least place 2nd in Iowa or NH.
 
jmag,
you've got a point about electability in the general election; that's absolutely critical.
I'm sure we disagree on what makes a candidate electable and why, but here's my take:
This is a bad year to be a Republican. To win this time requires not only energizing your base but converting a sizeable chunk of theirs as well.
I mean, look at the opinion polls. Look at the issues. Look at where the people are leaning and donating.
Why on earth would they vote for Huckabee?
Short answer is they don't want the war, don't like the economy, don't like the current administration, and don't like anyone who likes the current administration.
They won't vote for Huck.
 
The Dems WILL nominate Hillary. Neither Huckabee nor Paul will be the Repub nominee. That's all I'm willing to go out on a limb on at present.

Yes, it's going to be a tough ride for the Republican ticket this time around. There's baggage all around us.
 
That's pretty far out on the limb.

The Dems WILL nominate Hillary.
Click to expand...


That is the conventional wisdom, but the situation on the ground suggests otherwise. I'd hold off on such pronouncements until after New Hampshire at the earliest.
Not that it's especially relavant to this thread, but based on what I've seen my prediction is Obama, not Hillary.

Neither Huckabee nor Paul will be the Repub nominee.
Click to expand...
Again, wouldn't place any bets at this point.

Keep it firmly in mind that the people who are telling you this are the same people who said McCain and Dean had locks on their nominations. They're just reading the same self-fulfilling polls and pretending they know what's really going on.
People on the ground don't track polls. If you want to know who's really ahead, count yard signs. Count heads at campaign appearances. Count individual donors to campaigns. Count volunteers.
But beware the polling. It tells you nothing beyond who's getting the face time on TV.
The pundits aren't about to get out in the weeds and do the surveying (might muss their hair), so take what they tell you with a large grain of salt. They don't know any more than you do. If anything, they know even less; you can see what's going on around you with your own eyes.
 
... or exactly how life originated
Click to expand...

...all the further my arguement to give students all the information on both sides of the arguement so THEY can decide for themselves, not the public school system...

Wouldn't bother me in the least. I'd even be cool with an atheist as president.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't bother me either. A belief or disbelief in a god does not neccessarily qualify one for office.
Click to expand...

Can't further comment w/o violating forum rules (if I haven't already).

Same here. I don't care what your religion (or lack thereof) is so long as it doesn't interfere in your execution of the office.
Click to expand...

Understood. But, what message would that give to other countries of our foundation? Weakness. And, IMHO, they would be correct. I would view the same if a muslim founded nation would be ran by a christian...

Molson, you brought up some interesting stats that I need to research. One thing that I see troubling is that some of the tax issues you stated he PROPOSED. It's one issue if a tax hike passes under duress, another if it's proposed...
 
Someone's belief system ALWAYS influences their decisions and therefore would ALWAYS interfere in the execution of the office. Someone who says otherwise needs to evaluate what belief influenced their decision to say otherwise. ;)

Schools should teach our kids HOW to think, not WHAT to think. Teaching what to think is nothing more than indoctrination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top